Now, media has been handed to Everyperson. The bar of access to a worldwide mass media distribution has been drastically lowered. We’ve even got folks who are making their own homemade Star Trek episodes in their basement and broadcasting to the entire world, earning critical acclaim and guest cameos by original cast members.

In the flood of new material available for public consumption, suddenly the old mechanisms for determining quality are being redefined as well. Who are the masses listening to? Why? How did they hear about them? Are these the voices, public intellectual or otherwise, that are best qualified to be listened to? Who gets to decide those criteria?

Personally I see this as the same slow redefinition of professionalism which is happening society-wide. Old professions are being lost in the wake of the new technology, and skillsets and payscales are slowly being readjusted. Today’s professionals in any field must not only establish their own expertise in their fields, they are continually challenged to re-justify the need for a professional caste in that field to begin with. It’s just that the waters of social change finally rose high enough so that the ‘public intellectuals’ are starting to fear drowning, too.

The most successful blogs (in terms of Technorati ranting, hits, Bloggie awards, etc.) rarely mix diary entries with commentary on the outside word: their success is in part predicated on a particular, narrow focus. Someone blogging as a public intellectual (e.g. Andrew Sullivan or Arnold Zwicky) is generally not going to write much about their personal life. Likewise, a prominent diary blogger like Heather Armstrong of Dooce isn’t going to start mixing in posts on the federal income tax and welfare reform with pictures of her dog.